First, it is important to recognize that Job serves as a literary polemic*, a written indictment, against the gods of ancient Near Eastern mythology. Not only were pagans literally supplanted by people of the promise, but their mythological narratives were literarily supplanted by the metanarrative*, the overarching story of Scripture. It is not Baal who destroys “the writhing serpent, encircler-with-seven-heads” (Ugaritic text) but Yahweh who “crushed the heads of Leviathan” (Psalm 74:14). Thus, through literary subversion*, God recasts pagan myth in a manner that corresponds to reality.

Furthermore, it is crucial to note the literary progression of Job. After thirty-plus chapters of rambling human speculations, God answers Job out of the storm. In essence, the Almighty asks Job if he would like to try his hand at running the universe for a while: “Who fathers the drops of dew?” “Who can tip over the water jars of the heavens?” “Do you give the horse his strength?” “Does the eagle soar at your command?” Consider Behemoth, who “ranks first among the works of God” or the sea dragon—“Can you pull in the leviathan with a fishhook?” The literary progression moves from creation, to creatures, to the cherub who once ranked first in the order of creation. To Job, the primal monster of the land, like the primal monster of the sea, was indomitable. To Jehovah, Behemoth and Leviathan were mere pets on a divine leash. In the literary progression of the Bible, the monster is vanquished. Says Isaiah, “Leviathan the gliding serpent, Leviathan the coiling serpent; [God] will slay the monster of the sea” (27:1).

Finally, in interpreting Scripture in light of Scripture, the literary personification of Satan becomes readily apparent. In Genesis he is presented as an alluring serpent that tempts humanity to fall into lives of perpetual sin terminated by death; in Psalms he is portrayed as a multiheaded monster opposing the purposes of God; in Isaiah he is a coiling serpent emerging out of the primal waters; and in Revelation, a red dragon that personifies the extremities of evil.

In sum, Leviathan and Behemoth are not dinosaurs but personifications that illustrate a metaphysical reality. As such, the mythology of the dragon underscores the reality of the devil.

I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to
the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. He seized the
dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and
bound him for a thousand years.
Revelation 20:1–2

]]>http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/behemoth-leviathan-dinosaurs/feed/0How Do Progressive Creationists Deal with the Problem of Natural Evil Prior to Adam?http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/progressive-creationists-deal-problem-natural-evil-prior-adam/
http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/progressive-creationists-deal-problem-natural-evil-prior-adam/#commentsWed, 12 Feb 2014 18:08:13 +0000http://www.equip.org/?p=35051Progressive creationists* believe that animal suffering and death existed for millions of years prior to the creation of Adam and Eve. Thus the question: isn’t natural evil, like moral evil, a consequence of human sin?

First, old-earth progressive creationists see natural catastrophes and carnivorous animals as part of God’s “very good” creation. As such, they render animal suffering and death as good rather than evil.

Furthermore, progressive creationists make a distinction between the words good and perfect. Thus, in their view, God created the heavens and the earth and all that is in them “very good”—not perfect.

Finally, progressive creationists deny a biblical basis for believing that nature red in tooth and claw* resulted from Adam’s fall. Thus, they relate passages such as Romans 5:12 and 1 Corinthians 15:21–22 solely to human suffering and death, not the death and suffering evident in nature.

Sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men.
Romans 5:12

]]>http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/progressive-creationists-deal-problem-natural-evil-prior-adam/feed/0Is Animal Suffering a Consequence of Adam’s Sin?http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/animal-suffering-consequence-adams-sin/
http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/animal-suffering-consequence-adams-sin/#commentsWed, 12 Feb 2014 17:38:51 +0000http://www.equip.org/?p=35047I cannot persuade myself,” wrote Darwin, “that a beneficent and omnipotent God would have designedly created [the Ichneumonidae] parasitic wasps with the express intention of their feeding within the living bodies of caterpillars.” This conundrum ultimately led Darwin to dispense with the notion of a Creator God. In reality, however, Adam—not the Almighty—bears responsibility for the origin of moral and natural evil in the world.

First, the Bible clearly teaches that “sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin” (Romans 5:12). As a result, the whole of creation was subjected to “frustration” and “decay” (see Romans 8:19–23; cf. Genesis 1:29–30; 9:1–4; Psalm 104:19–28).

Furthermore, the federal headship* of Adam (Romans 5:12–21; 1 Corinthians 15:20–26) extends beyond humanity to all of God’s creation. Even the ground was cursed as a direct result of Adam’s rebellion. Not only so, but the present curse and the promised redemption extend beyond the ground to the very animals that walk upon it (Isaiah 11:6–9; 65:25; Revelation 21–22).

Finally, far from dispensing with God as a result of contemplating such natural horrors as a parasitic wasp, human and animal suffering should have driven Darwin to contemplate the full consequences of alienation from God. Indeed, exposure to natural evil outside the comforts of the garden must surely have caused Adam to understand the full gravity of his fall from grace. Put another way, chaos outside the garden reflected the horror of Adam’s sin-sick soul.

Tragically, Darwin could only conceive of time as linear. Had he comprehended a God unbounded by time, his evolutionary hypothesis may never have taken root. Surely God could cause the effects of the fall to temporally precede their cause! As intelligent design* theorist Dr. William Dembski has well said, “Just as the death and resurrection of Christ is responsible for the salvation of repentant people throughout all time, so the fall of humanity in the garden of Eden is responsible for every natural evil throughout all time (future, present, past, and distant past preceding the fall).”

The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God
to be revealed. For the creation was subjected to frustration,
not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who
subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated
from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious
freedom of the children of God.
We know that the whole creation has been groaning as
in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. Not
only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the
Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as
sons, the redemption of our bodies.
Romans 8:19–23

]]>http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/animal-suffering-consequence-adams-sin/feed/0Is This a Young World After All?http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/young-world/
http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/young-world/#commentsTue, 11 Feb 2014 18:07:17 +0000http://www.equip.org/?p=34999Many Christians consider the universe to be relatively young. But is it really? While special revelation (the Bible) does not specifically address the age issue, general revelation (the book of nature*) provides a veritable host of clues.

First, the reality that nothing travels faster than the speed of light and that billions of light-years separate us from distant galaxies leads logically to the assumption that the age of the universe is measured in billions rather than in thousands of years.

Furthermore, star life is a persuasive argument for a universe measured in billions of years. Star life depends on star mass. A star like the sun has enough fuel to burn for an estimated 9 billion years. Conversely, the fuel of a star half the size of the sun may last as long as 20 billion years. As such, the universe is presumed to be at least as old as the oldest stars within in it. While biological history may be a matter of inference, astronomical history is a function of direct observation. Put another way, star formation can be observed in all of its stages.

Finally, sequential layers in the formation of ice cores in places such as Antarctica and Greenland point to an earth much older than six thousand years. Just as arborists count tree rings to estimate the age of trees, researchers count sequential layers to date the age of ice cores. This data log seems to demonstrate that the age of the earth is at least hundreds of times older than the age presumed by young-earth creationists*.

First, creation out of nothing bolsters the notion of God’s necessary existence as the only Being who cannot not be. As such, the church fathers described the Father of creation as uncreated and unbegotten, in contrast to all else that was created and begotten. Put another way, all that exists, except God himself, is necessarily contingent on and grounded in the creative decisions and will of God.

Furthermore, creation ex nihilo also calls attention to God’s freedom to create or to act otherwise. As such, the cosmos and all that is in it was neither mandatory nor a mishap. God freely chose to create humans and a habitat distinct from himself.

Finally, the doctrine of creation out of nothing underscores the reality that God alone is omnipotent. A God who creates out of eternally existing matter is less than the omnipotent Sovereign of the universe who spoke, and all that is leaped into existence.

Is creation ex nihilo theologically significant? Indeed! It makes all the difference in the world.

For this is what the Lord says—
he who created the heavens,
he is God;
he who fashioned and made the earth,
he founded it;
he did not create it to be empty,
but formed it to be inhabited—
he says:
“I am the Lord<,
and there is no other.”
Isaiah 45:18

Source (and for further study), see Paul Copan and William Lane Craig, Creation Out of Nothing: A Biblical, Philosophical, and Scientific Exploration (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004).

]]>http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/creation-ex-nihilo-theologically-significant/feed/0What Are the Three Great Apologetic Issues?http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/three-great-apologetic-issues/
http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/three-great-apologetic-issues/#commentsFri, 07 Feb 2014 00:02:07 +0000http://www.equip.org/?p=34836There are three great apologetic issues—origins, resurrection, and biblical authority. Chief among these is the issue of origins.

First, how you view your origins will determine how you live your life. If you suppose you are a function of random processes, you will live life by a wholly different standard than if you know you are created in the image of God and accountable to him.

Furthermore, in a Christian worldview, the transcendent God who laid the foundations of the earth condescended to cloak himself in human flesh. The God-man Jesus not only died so that we might live, but he demonstrated that he was the Creator of life by raising himself from the dead. As such, Christ does not stand in a line of peers with Abraham, Buddha, or Confucius.

Finally, we can know with certainty that the Book, beginning with the words “In the beginning God” is the infallible repository of redemptive revelation. As Christians we do not accept this truth by blind faith but rather by faith rooted in fact.

But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect.
1 Pet er 3:15

]]>http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/three-great-apologetic-issues/feed/0Is There Evidence That Humans and Dinosaurs Walked Together?http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/is-there-evidence-that-humans-and-dinosaurs-walked-together/
http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/is-there-evidence-that-humans-and-dinosaurs-walked-together/#commentsFri, 23 Aug 2013 22:24:47 +0000http://www.equip.org/?p=29663Maybe you’ve seen it on the Internet, the popular claim that human footprints have been discovered alongside dinosaur tracks in the Paluxy Riverbed of Glen Rose, Texas. It is argued that these footprints in stone prove that the world is six thousand years old and therefore dinosaurs existed contemporaneously with human beings. Intensive scrutiny, however, has caused many to abandon this pretext.

First, while footprints of three-toed carnivorous dinosaurs (tridactyls) are evidenced in stone, there is no compelling evidence for human footprints in the same time and space. Indeed, the prints are either too large to be human or questionable in origin.

Furthermore, some of the prints previously attributed to humans show claw marks consistent with three-toed tridactyls and inconsistent with five-toed humans.

Finally, many prints claimed to be human are little more than erosion patterns—an illustration of wish giving birth to reality.

Creationists who have questioned the Paluxy Riverbed prints are to be commended for following facts and tracks wherever they lead. As noted by the Institute for Creation Research in their Acts and Facts, “Scientists must always be willing to re-evaluate prior interpretations once new data becomes available. Creationists have rightly accused evolutionists of being close-minded on key issues, and we cannot afford to become like them in this respect. Jesus Christ claimed to be the Truth, and since we follow Him, we must be lovers of truth.”

]]>http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/is-there-evidence-that-humans-and-dinosaurs-walked-together/feed/0Are Ape-Men Fictions, Frauds, and Fantasies?http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/ape-men-fictions-frauds-fantasies/
http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/ape-men-fictions-frauds-fantasies/#commentsWed, 09 Sep 2009 23:29:45 +0000http://www.equip.org/?p=32286As has been well said, there is no business like bone business. Pithecanthropus erectus, Piltdown man, and Peking man are prime exemplars.

First and perhaps best known among the ape-men icons is Pithecanthropus erectus. What is not as well known is that this fictional transitional form between apes and humans is based on nothing more than a skullcap, femur, three teeth, and a fertile imagination. Darwin protégé Sir Arthur Keith pointed to Pithecanthropus as an example of evolving gullibility in his profession. Nonetheless, Harvard’s Richard Lewontin said Pithecanthropus erectus, pet-named Java man, ought to be taught as one of the “five facts of evolution.”

Furthermore, Piltdown man is a famed fraud cleverly conceived, crudely carried out—the jaw of an ape stained to match a human skull. Ironically, the aforementioned Sir Arthur Keith declared that Piltdown “represents more closely than any human form yet discovered the common ancestor from which both the Neanderthal and modern types have been derived.” And the professor was not alone. Piltdown was used for forty years to dupe unsuspecting students into thinking macroevolution is a fact.

Finally, Peking man is pure fantasy—wish giving birth to reality. Peking man was fabricated on the basis of a dusty old tooth discovered by Dr. Davidson Black as he was about to run out of funds for his evolutionary explorations. The Rockefeller Foundation awarded Black a generous grant so he could keep on digging. While Peking man evolved over time into an interesting collection of fossils, it is hardly a credible ape-to-man transition.

One would suppose that mental digestion would improve over the years. But that has hardly been the case. In 2009, Dariwinius masillae, affectionately nicknamed “Ida,” was dubbed the “eighth wonder of the world”—the link between humans and the rest of the animal kingdom—and the most important fossil discovery in 47 million years. Currently, however, evolutionary scientists are uniformly convinced that Ida plays no role whatsoever in human evolution.